tv [untitled] November 22, 2014 10:00pm-10:31pm PST
eyesore walking around in certain places. and seeing accumulated trash and just the fences and how it just looks running up the stairway, it just seems out of place to me. i'm involved in the architecture and construction world. i do like seeing new projects. from the renderings i've seen of the green roof, new material, looks like something that would greatly beneficial this area. not only that but it will bring green jobs and help sustain the economy. so, thanks for hearing me out. hello, everybody. my name is vincent trowel. i am a resident of north beach. have been for about a year.
i currently visit coyt tower quite frequently and as a resident and visiting there often, staring at the current fence and the state where it is now has not been the most esthetically thing i've seen. so, after reviewing some of the plans and the project, decided to see that something positive will be done with the current space that it's in right now. so, thank you. good evening, my name is john stewart. i'm a neighbor, immediate neighbor about a block away. my day job involves managing and developing mostly affordable mixed use housing including north beach place on bay street.
my wife and i walk up telegraph hill periodically. we look at this site, we don't see it a icon i can except the chain link fence refuse collecting eyesore, that's in that sense. it is icon i can. i've been astounded at the [speaker not understood] sitting there 17 years doing nothing. and we have this optimum use you can do with that site. if you scroll down the uses, it's not a tax cutter [speaker not understood]. it doesn't work with multi-family [speaker not understood] apartment billion, as a special need development as we've been involved in district 3, it did you not work for a lot of reasons and access in financing. as a park it would be a
disaster. by the way, there's a parka above it which willv not include a view of the project. [speaker not understood] detached solution which we support. an overarching point i would like to make is when i read the controller's general fund report which shows shortfall of 66, 133, 2 82 and 339 million dollars in the general fund each year going from 14 and 15, in project will generate about 150 to 170,000 dollar tax increment [inaudible]. >> thank you. next speaker. good evening, my name is did you say tin [speaker not understood]. i recently moved to california
from colorado about two years ago and my wife and i are expecting our first child this christmas and thus have been looking to buy multi-bedroom single-family home for sometime. coming from rural colorado we were shocked to see the serious housing shortage in san francisco. we've been looking for over a year now and the inventory for single-family homes is quite limited. i see the tower every morning when i go to work. i reviewed the proposed plans for the townhomes being proposed. i support it. i believe the development will not only fill a need for single-family homes but greatly enhance the surrounding airs i can't. coming from someone who is actively looking to purchase a single-family home, i urge you to support this project and vote yes. thanks for your time. >> next speaker.
president chiu and board of supervisors, my name robert middle stot, i'm an architect and had an office since 2005. in 2005 i took an option on 115 telegraph boulevard and built [speaker not understood] and presented the design to the then district 3 supervisor. he told me all of the reasons why he and the neighbors couldn't support my design, that i would never get approval to build it. i felt intimidated. thoroughly discouraged, i released the auction on the property and unwilling to devote the [speaker not understood] supervisor peskin and the neighbor. they employed the same objection, none of them
reasonable nor viable, more or less as a smoke screen to thwart this application. this type of obstructionism ha become a true menace to san francisco and we are sick of it. please give your usev approval to this worthy project. thank you. ~ unanimous approval >> next speaker. good afternoon. my name is linda spence. until recently i lived on telegraph hill not far from this project. i don't believe that telegraph hill dwellers speak for the residents of telegraph hill or north beach. i support this project and i think it has wide community support. i particularly support the right of the property owner to develop had i property,
particularly when the proposed development need ~ meets all of the planning and zoning requirements. those who oppose this project say they are working to preserve san francisco's character, quite the contrary. i think the opposition represents a high degree of nimbiism. the strategy of those who oppose this project and virtually every other project in the northeastern area of the city is to spread this information and to use scare and delay tactic to that the project becomes financially unviable for the developer. this has been the strategy for the past ten years and i think there comes a time when all of us have to say, enough is enough. for this project that time is now. i ask you to move forward with the projects and deny the request -- to deny the appeals. thank you.
>> next up. hi, my name is calvin chin. i own a tic in the neighborhood and often visit the coyt tower. earlier this year i took time to walk up the filbert street stairs. someone commented how deeply and dirty the stairs were. i asked how long the lot was vacant. yedctionv how one of the most beautiful streets in san francisco could have such a thing. i thought it would be an absolutely wonderful addition to the neighborhood. the modern feel, but consistent [speaker not understood]. i strongly support this project and urge its approval. thank you. >> next speaker, please. i'm kyle patello.
i'm a resident here, i hope to become a resident here in san francisco. i've come to california, the united states, most i come to you blessed, needed, wanted and loved. i recognize you guys have a lot going on and i want you to know how much i appreciate the amount of effort you're putting into bringing to the people the services needed. and i recognize there are a few holes in serve is he that need to be rendered to the people, which is why i come to you with the intention of starting a business. and i guess but i need help with filling out some of the paperwork and making sure that i receive the support and love from my city and county and from the state of california and from the united states of america as well as the super power that be to make sure that we can help assist people who don't have a lot of resource he he and a lot of money right now so we can cure depression.
~ resources because i've suffered with it for a very long time and anyway, i come to you thankful. so far for all of the help that i have received from the people who love me and i intend to help -- move forward. so, i want to tell you guys thank you very much because without you, these people wouldn't have been >> ~ and that is across the board and across the nation and across the world. it started with my mom and dad and my grandmother and my families who have gone through their own trials and tribulations. for everything that i've been through, they still love me. and for the mistakes i've made myself, they he still love me. so, i love them. so, i just want to tell you guys thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please.
good afternoon, supervisors. my name is bill ricks and i own property just four doors down from the poe posed project. and i wanted to just offer my strong support for the project as planned. for the 25 years that i've lived in the area, that site has been unsightly, an eyesore, and i think that the proposed project would greatly enhance the value of the neighborhood and the beauty of the neighborhood and i hope that you strongly support it. thank you. >> are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in support of the project sponsor? okay, seeing none at this point, why don't we hear back from the appellant for up to five minutes of rebuttal. >> members of the board, my name is alice barkly. i'd like to focus on a couple
>> mrs. barkley, plea ~ please speak directly into the microphone. >> i'm sorry. this is how much of the view will be left. now, at supervisor chiu's office, we were able to -- thank you. first, in supervisor chiu's office, he tried to negotiate, mediate the parties come up with a solution. well, what happened is that they pretty much agreed to all of the condition of approval that are in exhibit 16 except for some yet to be done [speaker not understood]. they also presented [speaker not understood], this particular height reduction which is a great improvement. we would like to see this over,
but even this is a great improvement to what they are proposing. this would under the general plan urban design element, objective 2, policy 2.7, you have the discretion to require a design that will [speaker not understood], we serve as much a the view from pioneer park as possible. so, this one is going to approve this project at all, you must do that. and not only that, but when you're looking at the postcard image of the hill, you also have to require that the pack of back down the barm four or five story surface that what it
the only reason why we're not able to come up with any kind of conclusion in the negotiation is because they insisted that everything ha to be done by 3 o'clock today when the negotiation started on friday. and no one can with a board of directors pull everything together. it's not just one person in the ph.d.. and that's true. supervisor lee's question, there is a lot of concern about the school board. at the minimum, this board needs to continue this matter for one week so that the party can negotiate and more important they can really sit down and let the school board and [speaker not understood]
know what is happening because you are only getting the developer's view of what may be necessary. so, i don't think we're asking a lot. so, you should look at the public door corridor and make sure [speaker not understood] that you allow for the discussion. >> 34 second. i'm susan [speaker not understood] again. for the record i want to make sure you got mr. [speaker not understood]'s credential. bachelor's, masters, ph.d., as well as earthquake certificate. there's been a lot of talk about mitigation fees for garfield school. mitigations to feed categorical exemption. the fact you have existing regulations. if those regulations include discretionary review by your it
's been conceded, expression in environmental review [speaker not understood]. >> sure, i'll ask you to finish your final thoughts. >> thank you. [speaker not understood], not what what there. you have an [speaker not understood] under the steps of pioneer park under your own planning regulations, this is to be protected. and it is environmental, your staff told you it whatant a ceqa issue. it is a protector inconsistency is a ceqa issue. they think it's possible they can mitigate impacts. that is not the basis for a categorical exemption. there are conclusory statements. is there going to be no dufty,
no traffic impact? the questions about garfield school, where are the trucks going to turn around? the principal of the school is telling you they're concerned and they want re[speaker not understood]. what will happen if you deny the categorical exemption and approve the appeal, what will you get? no one is saying that there shouldn't be a project here. you'll get a better project. you'll get mitigations for impacts that are consistent with your planning documents. you'll get quadratickv documents, you'll ge some of the impacts. you'll get my drift. [speaker not understood]. thank you very much for giving me more time, president chiu. >> thank you.
colleagues, any final questions to any of the parties tonight? okay, this hearing has been held and is now in the hands of the board. [gavel] >> so, let me he ask if there are any other comments from colleagues. president chiu? >> thank you, colleagues. and i first want to take a moment and thank and appreciate all the input from the good neighbors on both side of this discussion around this project. we all know that development issues are never easy in san francisco. that is especially true in the northeast corner that i've been honored to represent the last six years. let me start by saying i agree with the appellants this is a special location. a someone who has been on coyt tower, i appreciate the views
downtown from telegraph hill boulevard. i also know these same views are available a you head up to pioneer pork. i also don't believe the project will take care of all the thing that we care about. but that question as you know is not before us today. fund [speaker not understood] appropriately issued by the planning department. clearly this is a building that is under six units in this very urban and dense area and to my mind the appellants have not presented substantial evident of a fair argument that this project will have significant effects on the environmental. i also believe that the protection act in 2008 under the leadership of my predecessor safely by the contractors with regard to dbi. with that, colleagues, i ask
that we affirm the cad ex for in project and if we do affirm it, i have some additional conditions i would like to add to the cu authorization. ~ affirm this project >> i know we have items 31 through 33 that are in the hand of the board. are there any other comments, colleagues? then can we have a motion -- i guess the motion is to affirm the certification of the cad ex, categorical exemption to approve item 31, table item 31 and table 32 and 33. is that the motion, president chiu? madam clerk, could we have a roll call? >> mr. president has made that motion. do we have a second? >> seconded by supervisor farrell. >> supervisor kim? kim no. supervisor mar? mar no. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener?
wiener aye. we'rev? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos no. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor co-ebb? ~ cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. 7 aye and 3 nos. >> the categorical exemption certification is affirmed and president chiu has said that he would introduce a number of potential conditions -- >> potential conditions related to addressing construction impacts. so, colleagues, as ms. barkley for the appellants suggested, my office did try to bring the parties together and i know that thises was a matter that over a number of months ~. there were many discussionses to try to resolve it. while we weren't able to get agreement between the parties, i do want to suggest that we amend conditions that i believe
both parties could agree on. there were a number of concerns raised around construction impact and specifically requested by the appellants and title sheet a0.0, the plan what approved by the planning commission, general notes 23 through 33 addressed construction staging and management issues of the project to address the neighbor's specific concerns around project construction. i had circulated to you conditions of approval that i would like to add. a number of them we made them stricter and clearer than the original condition that were proposed. what i would like to first do is read them so the public knows what we're talking about and then i do have a specific question to the deputy city attorney to just clarify the distinction of the conditions that we're making here. but specifically there are 11 conditions that i would like to propose, the additional conditions of approval. specifically to address some of the construction issues.
>> president chiu, before you start, let me say i forgot to mention with our vote we approved the final economic impact report. it's finally certified. now with the 11 conditions -- >> environmental impact reports. >> yes. >> great. so, with regard to the conditions of approval, let me run through the 11 proposed conditionses to generally address the construction impacts. first, along the filbert store frontage of the property it will be well let and well ventilated tunnel to be erected during the construction of the period for the individuals on the stairs. second, that there be a flag person permanently on the filbert stairs with a flag person [speaker not understood] vehicle in that area. third, a requirement that trucks ready to unload material be staged at a location off-site to avoid queuing of
trucks on telegraph hill boulevard. the off-site truck queuing location shall be determined in consill thaition with the neighbors with deliveries made before 4:00 p.m. on weekdays to avoid any traffic on column because avenue. trucks shall be routed to avoid columbus avenue. a fourth condition would be to require that construction be -- use the staging area on-site and avoid using the coyt tower parking lot for stakeving of construction 2. fifth all applicable weight limits to and from the site be observed and adhered to. sixth, until the building is fully enclosed and these are more specific time restrictions. no construction activity shall be permitted between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays or on saturday. no construction shall be [speaker not understood] on saturday or holidays. it shall comply with the city's noise ordinance. seventh, no construction
workers, trucks, or anyone else related to the activities, shall you garages and [speaker not understood] from the job site. the eighth condition of approval is that before starting construction, the contractor and the project sponsor shall provide detailed construction plans and they are -- there are descriptions of what we ask from those plans, truck routes site location for truck truing, and that these be provided to a wide variety of city agency. in addition to that the project sponsor shall inform the rec of current projects to address congestion. prior to the commencement of
construction, the project sponsor shall consult with garfield elementary school, the san francisco unified school district, the residents on assessor's block 86, 105 and 104 and within 300 feet of the project site. before the planning [speaker not understood], planning and truck route plans, a, schedule of delivery times during which construction materials are expected to arrive, and b, methods to be monitor to use truck movement so as to move conflicts on kearny street and [speaker not understood]. muni access to coyt tower shall be maintained at all times during construction. some issues suggested that would not be the case. the last condition would be the filbert street stairs along the frontage shall be maintained by the owners of the subject property, subject to the approval and appropriate agreements with the park and
parks department, and the department of building inspection. so, those are the condition that i've proposed . i've pro poed that to you. i want to [speaker not understood]. so, with that. >> deputy city attorney [speaker not understood]. a the board indicated, you have upheld the ceqa determination with a categorical exemption determination of the planning commission, denied the appeal on that. so, i would offer some clarification. these equal conditions if the board chooses to impose them on the conditional use authorization are being done on the board's authority on appeal of the conditional use authorization and are not to address the [speaker not understood] which the board has already determined the cad ex had been properly issued by the planning department. so, the board has additional
authority under the cu process to impose conditions even though the impacts on the project will be less than significant. >> with that, colleagues, what i'd like to ask is that we impose these additional conditions and approve an amended conditional use authorization. that would be amending item 36 in addition to [speaker not understood], approving the project with the additional conditionses tabling 35 and 37. >> thank you. is there a second on that motion? president chiu. >> excuse me one moment. why don't we proceed. >> and it's been seconded by supervisor farrell. colleagues, we have a motion. can we have a roll call, madam clerk? >> supervisor kim.
>> just to clarify, the motion is to approve item 36 and table 35 and 37 1234 >> that's correct. >> it's to amend item 36 and disapproval of the planning commission's decision and i'm approving the project with additional conditions. >> aye. >> kim aye. supervisor mar? mar no. supervisor tang? tang aye. ~ supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos no. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. there are 8 aye and two nos. >> mr. chair, i just want to clarify one thing. apparently when you discussed the previous item you preferred to an approval of the environmental impact report and we were affirming the cad ex so i wanted to make it fair we were not approving an e-i-r.